Google’s John Mueller says there’s no inherent WEB OPTIMIZATION receive advantages to including an audio version of a textual content-primarily based web site.
This topic is discussed throughout the Google Seek Primary WEBSITE POSITIONING hangout recorded on February 12.
The Following question is submitted to Mueller:
“May adding an audio version of a page’s content material help with seek in any means? other than the obvious accessibility growth.”
Adding an accompanying audio recording to a written publish is one thing more publishers were doing as of late.
Is it helping those publishers in search ratings?
Right Here’s what Mueller has to mention.
Google’s John Mueller On Audio + Text Content Material
Unlike photograph and video, Google doesn’t do anything special with audio content material.
Audio content is not processed one at a time through Google. At such a lot it would be observed as a piece of video content material which might lead to a video snippet.
Mueller says, as some distance as what he knows, adding an audio recording to a text put up does not lend a hand or harm scores.
“As far as i do know we don’t do the rest with audio versions of content material. We additionally wouldn’t see that as replica content, so it’s now not that you have to steer clear of that.
I imply, duplicate content itself isn’t something you really have to avoid, however even though you sought after to avoid the situation that you just’re abruptly ranking for the same things with different items of content, the audio version is something that we, as far as i know, wouldn't even process one at a time.
At most we might see that as a piece of video content and show that still with a video snippet. But, essentially, it wouldn’t lend a hand or detract from a page’s general ranking.”
Mueller is about to transport directly to some other question when an SEARCH ENGINE OPTIMIZATION named Robb Young jumps in to ask for clarification.
He asks: Doesn’t including an audio recording do anything else for SEO?
Is a web page no longer observed as upper quality while it has text and audio in comparison to simply text?
Mueller remains firm at the resolution he at first supplied. Google does not view a web page as higher quality as it has a couple of types of content material.
However, there could be indirect advantages such as the web page getting shared around more.
“I don’t suppose we'd look at that and say: “oh there are different kinds of content material here, it’s a better web page on account of that.”
It could be that there are indirect results, like if customers in finding this page more helpful they usually counsel it extra, that’s something that might have an effect.
but it’s now not the case that we take a look at the sorts of content on a web page and say: “oh there’s sorts as opposed to five types, the only with 5 types is better.””
Finally, Mueller provides there are advantages associated with adding pictures and/or video to a website as a result of those content material varieties can each and every rank independently.
There’s no separate set of search scores for audio content material.
“i feel it’s slightly other with video and photographs in that photographs and video themselves can rank independently. Like in image seek and video search you'll be able to have the same piece of content material be visible in those other surfaces. However for audio we don’t really have a separate audio search where that page may also rank.
the nearest that could come there may be the podcast search that we have, or the podcast one field thing, but that’s in reality tied to the podcast content kind where you have a feed of podcast data and we can index it like that. However just having audio on a page by itself, I don’t assume that may amendment the rest automatically in our techniques.”
Hear the full query and resolution under: